Switching from UDK to Unity?

Right now I have created a game in UDK, but am getting mad at the lack of publishing options so I am looking to transfer over to Unity in instead.

My game is a very simple top down game with a rolling ball as the player that requires the player to solve puzzles to finish the levels. The menu systems are made with scaleform and I really like its implementation.

So how hard to do you think it would be to re make the game in Unity instead? I can pick up coding languages really easily and I think my experience with UDK should help me understand Unity.

So...what? Their computers don't have USB ports for thumb/external drives? Why would you switch engines based off of a competition anyways?

Click to expand...

Well more or less skilled people change engines all the time for competitions if the particular engine doesn't satisfy the requirements.
For example wolfire use their own engine for overgrowth and yet they used unity for game jam cause it satisfied their particular need.
There is a choice, so why not?

I'm having to swith because UDK can't run off a disc alone, it has to be installed. So I'm turning to Unity because I know for a fact that it will work.
Oh and I must say you guys are much nicer than the ones on the udk forums

I'm having to swith because UDK can't run off a disc alone, it has to be installed. So I'm turning to Unity because I know for a fact that it will work.
Oh and I must say you guys are much nicer than the ones on the udk forums

Click to expand...

Well.. I don't mean to brag... but we do have the best community in the universe! :3~

Well more or less skilled people change engines all the time for competitions if the particular engine doesn't satisfy the requirements.
For example wolfire use their own engine for overgrowth and yet they used unity for game jam cause it satisfied their particular need.
There is a choice, so why not?

Click to expand...

Did they switch game engines for their game (Overgrowth) or did they create a new game?

What I'm getting at, is that the OP has a project that's already been under development, but wants to suddenly switch engines because of a competition/compiling options. It just doesn't make sense to me.

I consider decent game a game, which is worthy of my time and I spent with it at least one day (8 hours).
So did you play any of these games? Maybe I am wrong, but answer would be NO. Decent game is able to attract people. Have you thought "omg, this is exactly what I was searching for" and spent next month playing it?
It is nice that there is big list of various games, but it does not tell anything about success and quality. And since vast majority of these games are very simple games with outdated graphics, it tells nothing about engine capabilities too. Only message is, that Unity can deliver simple games.

How many AAA RPGs (MMOs) and FPS is made on Unity? Zero. How many on engines like CE, UDK, Trinigy? Lots of. If Unity is so kickass platform like fanboys are singing, why there are NO important games from big companies developed on it?

If anybody asks me about Unity capabilities, I will tell him, that Unity is probably good for doing small games for various platforms, but not usable for big games. Maybe this will change in few years, but not there yet.

Volunteer ModeratorModerator

So did you play any of these games? Maybe I am wrong, but answer would be NO.

Click to expand...

You're definitely wrong. I've played, and own, a number of them. Several I didn't actually know were made with Unity until I saw that list. Anyway, nice move trying to switch your definition of "decent game" to "AAA RPG MMO", but I think you know how absurd that is. Whether or not Unity can do AAA MMO games is more or less irrelevant, since 99.99% of users don't have the resources to do that regardless of what engine they're using. (And personally I have little interest in even playing those kind of grindfests masquerading as games, never mind trying to make one.) So obviously "small" games are going to vastly outnumber big-budget games; that doesn't make them less worthy if they're good. I recently played Limbo and had a good time--it took maybe 5 hours, but was worthwhile. It wasn't made with Unity, but could have been, and in fact Playdead have said they're using Unity for their next game.

How many AAA RPGs (MMOs) and FPS is made on Unity? Zero. How many on engines like CE, UDK, Trinigy? Lots of. If Unity is so kickass platform like fanboys are singing, why there are NO important games from big companies developed on it?

If anybody asks me about Unity capabilities, I will tell him, that Unity is probably good for doing small games for various platforms, but not usable for big games. Maybe this will change in few years, but not there yet.

I consider decent game a game, which is worthy of my time and I spent with it at least one day (8 hours).

Click to expand...

I love how this completely arbitrary definition [dreamed up to spite u3d if I was to hazard a guess] not only completely removes entire sections of the game world [Flash games anyone?] but fails to recognize traditional greats.

Crysis 2, pretty decent AAA game only had 6 hours to play for me.

Portal, one of the greatest games of all time, only took ~4 hours to do. Hell, I've played it at least twice and only logged 6 hours!

While having a substantial lifespan may be highly regarded feature by some players - to remove all games on the basis of a 8 hours playtime says a lot more about the ignorance and shortsightedness of the reviewer, than the games themselves. This coupled with the rather egoistical requirements 'decent game a game, which is worthy of my time' does nothing but support my view of the poster. There are plenty of decent games out there that I don't play nor have any intention of playing.

How many AAA RPGs (MMOs) and FPS is made on Unity? Zero. How many on engines like CE, UDK, Trinigy? Lots of. If Unity is so kickass platform like fanboys are singing, why there are NO important games from big companies developed on it?

Click to expand...

Battlestar Galactica MMO. Big important game, from a publisher that has more than 250Mn registered users, made in U3D, and, from what I've heard, solves some technically challenging problems with regards to scale.

How many AAA RPGs (MMOs) and FPS is made on Unity? Zero. How many on engines like CE, UDK, Trinigy? Lots of. If Unity is so kickass platform like fanboys are singing, why there are NO important games from big companies developed on it?

So you're making a rolling ball game?
I hear you can't use Unity to make a game like, um, GooBall. *tongue-in-cheek*

@Random thread viewers

Re: high quality games in Unity; before anybody mentions Interstellar Marines (which is pretty far from finished, and IMO not yet a good reference), note that ShadowGun is a much better baseline for what a competent small team can do with Unity, and that on a resource constrained platform (iOS).

OMG I love these posts so much, Unity like UDK is a free download. I have to question anyone who posts and trolls on the forum instead of just downloading the freaking product and trying it out for themselves.

The best way to see if the product fits what you want to do is install it and go through a few tutorials. Seriously...

How many games have been finished by Indie studios using Unity: many
How many games have been finished by Indie studios using UDK, CE etc: not so many (if any)

You are comparing a mutli-million dollar investment, done 2-3 years ago using the industry standard
(cos it's an industry simply by it's shear size), with an engine that targets another market all-together.

Of course you can do awesome things with Unity, but you have to invest the same amount of people and money as for any triple AAA game.

Also as we discussed a AAA game has nothing to do with duration of gameplay and nothing to do with "Did Demosthenes like it?"

it has to do wtih "production quality", which is actually a reference to the money spent.

Companies have started to experiment with Unity and it's obvious that de-throning Unreal is difficult, as discussed by industry veterans on this very forum, a team doesn't switch engine simply because it has some nice features, nor does a project get a greenlight because the engine is cheap.

When millions of dollars are at stake you purchase what others purchased simply to add to the security of your investment, it might be crap to work with, but it has a proven track record and that is the only thing that counts.

For example: we are making an FPS game, engine A has 50 FPSs, engine B 2, I choose to invest in the safe choice so as not to lose 50million.

Game Development is risky as hell, why take a chance when you have something that works? If you are in charge of a multi-million project and didn't go with the proven choice and the product you chose is a show-stopper, you are simply not fit for the job.

That's why Modern Warfare 3,the top grossing FPS , uses what is essentially a hammered out Quake 3 engine, not even Doom 3 engine. They know it works, they have assets for it , they can simply add on to it and they make more money than Crytek could dream of, off a single game, that they can push out yearly.

Do you get it? Quake 3, though they make billions, why? Are they stupid? Are you smarter than them? Is quake3 good to work with? They probably have a ton crap of tools to do the work, they have probably re-written half of it or even more.

If you can't understand this simple stuff Demosthenes I really can't comprehend how you expect someone to take you seriously.

It's like asking every company to use the Mazda engine (it is a weird design, look it up) when everyone else uses a different design, you don't bet your whole company on this interesting design (it's been around for years), simply because running the company and making a profit is already difficult.

In addition, whether an engine has AAA capability or not is not the issue. This horse has been beaten to death a million times in these forums. It's about whether or not an engine attracts developers with resources. Unreal (and NOT UDK) naturally attracts developers with resources based on the simple fact that it costs around 1 mil to licence the source. UDK however is free, just like Unity, and therefore attracts indies who want to experiment with no risk. Naturally you won't find AAA games in either of the two engines.

A company that will decide to use Unity for AAA games will licence its source, just like it would for Unreal, and as the Store section says, licencing happens on a title basis. Already we've moved far and beyond the resource capabilities of 99.9% of both UDK and Unity communities.

I agree to some extend with Demostenes. Unity hasn't produced any AAA games (I don't consider BSG AAA). It's not the engine's fault though. It's pure economics.

Battlestar Galactica MMO. Big important game, from a publisher that has more than 250Mn registered users, made in U3D, and, from what I've heard, solves some technically challenging problems with regards to scale.

Click to expand...

AFAIK they have source code licence. With source code you can make MMO even from spreadsheet, if you have enough resources.

Obviously he refers to proper culling, LOD and terrain generation. I've read his arguments in other similar threads.

I still maintain my opinion on economics however. Unity is free. And without paying a dime (or even paying only 1500-3000 USD) you have some features missing. If you have the resources however, you can licence and expand the source to add said features. Nobody said Unity-Basic can make AAA games. I did state however that if you have the money, Unity can be as good a choice as any other engine.

Haha I know, right? and whenever he posts an image it looks awful and is using cheap art from dexsoft.

Click to expand...

I am really curious on your screenshots. Take one of my awful pictures (scene picture, not some devolopement sand box) and put yours for comparison besides. I am waiting, but I doubt that you have anything and that you ever will have anything comparable.

I assume we're not referring to AAA games as a minimum budget amount of people involved. So this must be a graphics thing! AAA games are games with really good graphics... (also sound quality, etc).

Also, I think quality is more relevant than quantity here, right?
Personally, I think Unity gives you enough tools to make a great AAA game. Does it give you the tools to make ANY kind of AAA game? Say, one with a humongous map? And, state of the art shaders with real volumetric fog, real time AO, DOF, etc? Maybe not, but you can fit enough beautiful art in it to make the best game a gamer can see.

It's up to the developer to imagine a AAA quality game, in his head. Of course, if the developer lacks imagination, and can only think bigger map == better, more polies == better, then maybe Unity is not the best choice, right?

It's up to the developer to imagine a AAA quality game, in his head. Of course, if the developer lacks imagination, and can only think bigger map == better, more polies == better, then maybe Unity is not the best choice, right?

Click to expand...

Demagogy. So if you are doing small never-published casual, you are cool boy, but if you want to make something bigger, you lack imagination? Are you serious? This really looks like envy, that some teams have resources and know-how to make big game.

Demagogy. So if you are doing small never-published casual, you are cool boy, but if you want to make something bigger, you lack imagination? Are you serious? This really looks like envy, that some teams have resources and know-how to make big game.

Click to expand...

Wait, don't go extreme! You can do a pretty big game with Unity, you just can't go huge... or 'humongous' as I said. Never said Unity could only do small casual games!

I did say, though, if your only tool to make a better game is by the means of better specs, then you're missing out a lot of things, like artistic style, artistic details, creative gameplay, etc.

If you tackle those elements, which are the developer's part of the job, Unity will do its part, and then you'll find it's possible to make an outstanding game with it! AAA quality, if you may!

Oops...

"Unity", Unity logos, and other Unity trademarks are trademarks or registered trademarks of Unity Technologies or its affiliates in the U.S. and elsewhere (more info here). Other names or brands are trademarks of their respective owners.